STAFF REPORT ACTION REQUIRED

Appeal by Kramer Design Ltd. of the Chief Building Official's Decision With Respect to a Signage Master Plan Proposal for Three First Party Ground Signs at 483

Date: March 11, 2015

Ward: Centre- Rosedale (27)

File No.: FP-13-00134

IBMS File No.: 13-265064

PURPOSE OF THE APPEAL

This report reviews and makes Figure 1: Key Map – 483 Bay Street recommendations on an appeal made by Kramer Design Ltd. (the "Appellant") regarding a decision of the Chief Building Official to refuse to grant one variance to Chapter 694, to permit the erection and display of three ground signs, each at the intersection of Albert Street and Bay Street; the intersection of Albert Street and James Street; and, to the north of an underground parking entrance servicing the building, fronting Bay Street (the "Proposed Signs").

The subject premises is located in the City Hall Special Sign District (CHNPS-SSD) which does not permit the erection and display of the Proposed Signs.

This report recommends that the decision of the Chief Building Official to refuse the requested variance required for the implementation of the proposed Signage Master Plan be upheld. It is the opinion of staff that the Proposed Signs are not compatible with the development of the premises and surrounding area; do not support Official Plan objectives; will adversely affect adjacent premises; will alter the character of the area; and, are contrary to the public interest.

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 1

RECOMMENDATIONS

The Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building, recommends that:

1. The Sign Variance Committee refuse the variance requested to § 694-26F(1) which requires any first party sign located on a premises designated as City Hall Nathan Philips Square Special Sign District — CHNPS-SSD to comply with the applicable provisions of §§ 297-9, 297-10, 297-11 and 297-12 of Chapter 297, Signs, of the Municipal Code of the former City of Toronto, as they applied to the premises on the day before Chapter 694 came into effect be varied as required to allow the issuance of permits for the erection and display of three first party ground signs as described in Appendix 1 of this report.

REQUIRED VARIANCES

As provided for in the summary above and in the table below, one variance is required from the regulations of Chapter 694 to permit the erection and display of the Proposed Signs.

Table 1: Summary of Requested Variances Section Requirement Proposal

The proposal contemplates the erection and display of two ground No person shall erect or display a ground signs on the premises along the sign along the east side of Bay Street east side of Bay Street between between Albert Street and 694-26F(1) Albert Street and Dundas Street West nor along the north side of Albert West and one ground sign along Street between James Street and Bay the north side of Albert Street Street. between James Street and Bay Street.

The proposal contemplates the erection and display of three ground A non-illuminated wall sign for the purpose signs, each containing two of identification is permitted provided that it 694-26F(1) illuminated sign faces, one of which shall not exceed a height of 10 metres on contains readograph copy the westerly or southerly facing wall. (displayed electronically), for directory and parking purposes.

COMMENTS

As part of the sign regulations contained in Chapter 694, Signs, General, the City has introduced the ability for individuals to obtain a Signage Master Plan ("SMP") to set out specific regulations for the location, arrangement, type and design of signs at a specific location or area. The intent of the SMP is to provide staff the ability to review and consider a comprehensive plan for signage on a premises. The SMP process requires that at least three signs on the premises require variances to Chapter 694.

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 2

SITE CONTEXT AND SIGN DISTRICT DESIGNATION

The subject premises, municipally known as 483 Bay Street, is located in Ward 27, Toronto Centre-Rosedale, and is situated at the north-east corner of the intersection of Bay Street and Albert Street. The property is generally bordered by James Street to the east, Albert Street to the south, Bay Street to the west, and a pedestrian pathway leading to to the north.

The property is situated to the east of and Nathan Phillips Square, the seat of Toronto's municipal government and multi-use public space which is the site of concerts, art displays, a weekly farmers market, and other public municipally-sanctioned events. To the south of the subject premises is Toronto's . Designated a National Historic Site of Canada, it is one of the city's most prominent and recognizable landmarks. To the east of the premises is the Eaton Centre, Toronto's largest shopping complex and a prominent Toronto tourist attraction. To the north and east of the subject building is Trinity Square, the Anglican Church of the Holy Trinity, as well as a number of other heritage buildings. To the north of the subject premises, across the pedestrian pathway, is the Toronto Marriott Hotel.

The building on the premises, commonly referred to as "Bell Trinity Square", is a mixed-use commercial-retail building of 15 storeys (north tower), and 10 storeys (south tower). The primary building frontage is along Bay Street, with the main entrances to the building being at the intersection of Bay Street and Albert Street, and Albert Street and James Street.

The CHNPS-SSD is composed of three separate areas, located north, south and east of City Hall and Nathan Philips Square. Area 'A', generally extends south from Edward Street to the northern extent of Toronto's City Hall, and is bordered by Bay Street to the east, and University Avenue to the west. Area 'B', extends south from Dundas Street West Albert Street, encompassing the property frontages along Bay Street. Area 'C' encompasses the area to the south of City Hall, and is generally bordered to the north by , to the south by Richmond Street West, to the east by Bay Street, and to the west by York Street.

The subject property is located in Area 'B' of CHNPS-SSD. The premises is immediately bordered to the north by other CHNPS-SSD designated properties. To the east and south, lands are designated CR-Commercial Residential with lands being designated OS-Open Space, further to the north and east. The lands to the south are designated CR-Commercial Residential, while the property to the west composing Toronto City Hall and Nathan Phillips Square is designated as both OS-Open Space and CR-Commercial Residential sign districts.

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 3

Table 2: Summary of Area and Sign District Designations Land Uses of Surrounding Properties:

North East South West Pedestrian , Toronto Old City Toronto City Hall, Pathway, Toronto Trinity Square, Church, Hall Nathan Phillips Square Marriott Hotel Heritage Buildings Sign District Designation of Property: CHNPS-SSD

Sign District Designations of Surrounding Properties:

North East South West CR-Commercial CR-Commercial OS-Open Space, CR- CHNPS-SSD Residential, OS-Open Residential Commercial Residential Space

SIGN ATTRIBUTES

The proposal contemplates three ground signs, each at the intersection of Albert Street and Bay Street ('Sign A'), the intersection of Albert Street and James Street ('Sign B'), and, to the north of the underground parking entrance, fronting Bay Street ('Sign C').

Sign A and B are to contain two non-illuminated sign faces displayed back-to-back, each displaying static copy. The proposed signs are to be 1.45 meters in horizontal width by 4.27 metres vertical length at a total height of 4.27 metres and are to be used primarily for identification purposes. Sign C is to contain two illuminated sign faces, displayed back-to- back, and both displaying static copy and readograph copy (displayed electronically). The proposed sign is to measure 0.97 metres in horizontal width by 2.74 metres in vertical length, at a total height of 3.66 metres. The portion of the sign face displaying readograph copy is to be 0.75 metres in horizontal width by 1.00 metres in vertical length.

Table 3: Summary of Sign Attributes

Sign Type: • The proposal is for three ground signs

• Two signs are to display static copy Sign Copy Type: • One sign is to display both static and readograph copy

# of Sign Faces • Each of the Proposed Signs is to contain two sign faces

• Sign A is to be erected at the north-east corner of the intersection of Albert Street and Bay Street and oriented in a northerly/southerly direction. Sign Location and • Sign B is to be erected at the north-west corner of the intersection of Albert Orientation: Street and James Street and oriented in an easterly/westerly direction. • Sign C is to be erected on Bay Street at the northerly portion of the premises, and oriented in a northerly/southerly direction.

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 4

• Sign A is to be 1.45 metres in horizontal width by 4.27 metres in vertical length. Sign Face Dimensions • Sign B is to be 1.45 metres in horizontal width by 4.27 metres in vertical (width x length): length. • Sign C is to be is to be 0.97 metres in horizontal width by 2.74 metres in vertical length.

BACKGROUND

Chapter 694 establishes distinct Special Sign Districts, or areas of Toronto where signs are a factor setting the area's fundamental visual character in a manner that differentiates it from other sign districts with similar uses or development. These areas are exempt from the general sign standards and include special provisions which are warranted based on a district-wide character related to signs.

Special Sign Districts generally correspond to two types of areas. In one instance the character of the area is established by the presence of and type of signage in the area. Examples of this include the Yonge & Dundas Special Sign District and the Chinatown Special Sign District.

In other instances, the absence of signs is a key factor defining the area's visual character. To maintain this character and avoid any detrimental visual impact on these areas from signage, greater restrictions on signs are required than apply in general sign districts. Chapter 694 contains specific restrictions applicable to the City Hall Nathan Phillips Square Special Sign District (CHNPS-SSD), aimed at protecting and maintaining the visual character of the area.

The character of Nathan Phillips Square has been protected since 1947 with the establishment of the Civic Square By-law (No.16825), which regulated certain uses on the lands adjacent to the then proposed Civic Square. The regulations included restrictions on signs, limiting them to the name of the business in the building and requiring signs to be made of metal or be carved in stone.

In 1995, Chapter 297, Sign of the Municipal Code of the former City of Toronto, was amended by By-law 1994-0337, placing further restrictions on signs in the vicinity of City Hall and Nathan Phillips Square, and ensuring the continued protection of the areas unique character. Today there continues to be a need to ensure that views of City Hall and Nathan Phillips Square are preserved from visual intrusion and that the area remained the civic symbol for which the City is well known.

Chapter 694 relies on the provisions established by Chapter 297, for the protection of the area encompassing the CHNPS-SSD. Specifically, Chapter 694 states that the CHNPS-SSD may contain any first party sign which complies with the applicable provisions of §§ 297-9, 297- 10, 297-11 and 297-12, of Chapter 297.

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 5

APPLICANT'S SUBMISSION PACKAGE

The Applicant's submission package is provided in Appendix 2 of this report. It should be noted that following staff's decision to refuse the variance required to permit the erection and display of the Proposed Signs, staff worked with the Appellant to develop an alternate proposal that would better fit with the character of the area. Staff noted that the primary concern is the proposed sign to be erected at the intersection of Bay Street and Albert Street. In an effort to protect adjacent properties from visual intrusion, and provide a level of signage that is consistent with the architecture of the building at 483 Bay Street, staff suggested a proposal that would incorporate tenant identification into the building's landscape planting bed at the intersection of Bay Street and Albert Street.

While the Appellant provided an alternate concept, it was the opinion of staff that the revised proposal would continue to alter the subject premises, have a negative impact on adjacent properties, and conflict with the Special Sign District provisions. Following on-going discussions with the Appellant, staff were unable to reach an agreement that would satisfy both the Appellant's needs and the policy direction that seeks to maintain the character of the area.

CRITERIA ESTABLISHED BY §694-30A OF CHAPTER 694

In order to review, consider and make recommendations on sign variance applications, criteria to evaluate an application for a variance is provided in Chapter 694. §694-30A states that an application for a variance from the provisions of Chapter 694 may only be granted where it is established that the proposed sign meets each of these criteria.

Administrative Criteria

The Administrative Criteria are listed at §694-30A (1), (2), and (7) of Chapter 694. They are criteria that are evaluated largely by looking at the sign class and sign type, as defined, as well as determining if the proposed sign is a sign that is otherwise prohibited.

As provided in Table 4 below, the Proposed Signs meet all three of the administrative criteria for a variance to be granted. The Proposed Signs are located within the CHNPS-SSD, which permits first party signs; they're not third party signs; and, are also not prohibited by §694- 15B.

694-30(1) Belong to a sign class permitted in the sign district where the premises is located.

The Proposed Signs are first party signs. The subject premises is located in the CHNPS-SSD, which does permit first party signs.

694-30(2) In the case of a third party sign, be of a sign type that is permitted in the sign district, where the premises is located.

The Proposed Signs are first party signs.

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 6

694-30(7) Not be a sign prohibited by § 694-15B

The Proposed Signs are not prohibited by § 694-15B.

Table 4: Summary of Administrative Criteria Meets Section Criteria Description Criteria? Rationale (yes/no) Belongs to a sign The Proposed Signs are first party sign, which 694-30A(1) class permitted in the Yes are permitted in the CHNPS-SSD. sign district In the case of a third party sign, must be of 694-30A(2) Yes The Proposed Signs are first party signs. a sign type permitted in the sign district Not be a sign The Proposed Signs are not prohibited by by 694-30A(7) prohibited by §694- Yes §694-15B 694. 15B

Design Criteria

The Design Criteria are listed at §694-30A (3), (4), and (8). These criteria are focused on the compatibility of the Proposed Signs with the current and future development of the subject premises and surrounding area. In reviewing an application against these criteria, staff consider, amongst other things, surrounding developments (existing or proposed), signs, and relevant city policies.

As provided in Table 5 below, the Proposed Signs do not meet all three of the design criteria for a variance to be granted. The proposal is not compatible with the development of the premises and the surrounding area; is contrary to Official Plan objectives; and, is not compatible with, and is likely to alter the character of development on the premises and surrounding area.

694-30A(3) Is the proposal compatible with the development on the premises and surrounding area

The CHNPS-SSD has been identified largely due to the historically and culturally significant nature of uses in the area. The restrictions on signage provided by both Chapter 694 and Chapter 297 assist in the conservation and careful management of the visual character of both the CHNPS-SSD and the impact additional signage has on adjacent properties. Proposals for additional signage in the area should ensure that they meet an accepted standard of design that is consistent with the 'sacrosanct' nature of the area.

The subject premises is adjacent to Toronto's Old City Hall, Nathan Phillips Square, Toronto's 'new' City Hall, Trinity Square, and other heritage-recognized buildings. This combination of public space and historically and culturally significant buildings are an important and powerful part of Toronto's built form, and should be valued for their significant history and character. Accordingly, there is little or no other first party signage on properties to the

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 7 immediate west and south of the subject premises, as the provisions of both Chapter 694 and Chapter 297 limit the extent of signage in the area.

The Appellant noted in their application package that the area surrounding City Hall has changed with the emergence of new residential and retail intensification, and that the subject building and premises has now become a public, mixed-use commercial and retail facility. While staff do not disagree with this sentiment, the Appellant has not provided a rationale as to how the Proposed Signs are compatible with the other sensitive uses directly adjacent to and surrounding the subject building and premises.

It is the opinion of staff, that while the proposal may be compatible with the use of the subject premises as a mixed-use development, the Proposed Signs are not consistent with nor compatible with the adjacent historically and culturally significant uses, which have been identified and protected by the provisions applicable to the CHNPS-SSD.

694-30A(4) Does the proposal support the Official Plan objectives for the property and surrounding area

The Official Plan identifies the subject premises as a Mixed Use Area. Mixed Use Areas are to achieve a multitude of planning objectives by combining a broad array of residential uses, offices, retail and services, institutions, recreation and cultural activities, and parks and opens spaces. Development criteria for these areas includes locating and massing new buildings to provide a transition between areas of different development intensities and scale, by providing appropriate setbacks and/or a stepping down of heights. These areas encourage walk-ability and the promotion of an attractive, comfortable, and safe pedestrian environment.

The area to the west of the subject premises is designated as an Institutional Area, Parks Area, and Other Open Space Area, while the area to the south of the premises is designated as an Institutional Area. Institutional Areas are to serve a variety of purposes, including major educational, health and governmental uses, with their ancillary uses, cultural, parks, and recreational facilities.

The Official Plan notes that beautiful, comfortable, safe and accessible streets, parks, open spaces, and public buildings are a key shared asset in the city. Public spaces, such as Nathan Phillips Square, draw people together, and convey the city's public image, setting the stage for festivals, parades and civic life, as well as for daily casual contact.

The Official Plan recognizes that buildings should work together to create great streets, plazas, parks and public spaces. Public buildings are to be located and designed to promote their public status, on prominent, visible and accessible sites, including street intersections, while open space associated with public buildings is to be designed to enhance the quality setting for the building while supporting a variety of public functions.

Finally, the Official Plan recognizes that Toronto's heritage buildings help create a unique sense of place. Development adjacent to properties listed on the City's Inventory of Heritage Properties should respect the scale, character and form of the heritage buildings and landscape.

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 8

It is the opinion of staff that the Proposed Signs do not support the vision and objectives established by the Official Plan for the area around 483 Bay Street.

694-30A(8) Does the proposal alter the character of the premises or surrounding area

Signage in the CHNPS-SSD has been regulated in an effort to protect the historically and culturally significant nature of uses in the area. While the Appellant noted in their original submission materials that the two ground signs and one replacement ground sign do not alter the character of the premises and surrounding area, as the use of the subject premises has evolved, it is the opinion of staff that the character of the surrounding area has remained consistent, and continues to be identified based on its cultural significance and role as a public centre.

Table 5: Summary of Design Criteria Meets Section Criteria Description Criteria? Rationale (yes/no) • The building on the premises, commonly known as Bell Trinity Square, was constructed in 1982 and has been identified as an example of post modern architecture. Compatible with the • The subject premises is adjacent to Toronto's development on the Old City Hall, Nathan Phillips Square, 694-30A(3) No premises and Toronto's 'new' City Hall, Trinity Square, and surrounding area other heritage recognized buildings. • The Proposed Signs are inconsistent with the architecture of the building on the premises, and the civic nature of other uses in the area.

• The Official Plan recognizes Toronto's heritage buildings and specifies that Supports the Official development adjacent to heritage properties Plan objectives for should respect the scale, character and form 694-30A(4) No the property and of the heritage buildings and landscape. surrounding area • The applicant has not provided a rational to demonstrate how the Proposed Signs would support Official Plan objectives for the area.

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 9

• Given the nature of uses in the immediate area, there are little or no other first party signs on adjacent properties.

o The subject premises contain one Does not alter the existing ground sign that identifies an character of the underground parking facility on the 694-30A(8) No premises or property. surrounding area o Two of the Proposed Signs are to be used exclusively for tenant identification and are to be significantly larger than the existing parking garage sign.

Impact Criteria

The Impact Criteria are the criteria listed at §694-30A (5), (6), and (9). These criteria are focused on the impact that a sign may have on surrounding buildings and properties and on the public in general. These criteria also consider whether or not the Proposed Signs will have any impacts on public safety.

The Proposed Signs do not meet all three of the impact criteria required for a variance to be granted. The Proposed Signs adversely affect adjacent premises; do not adversely affect public safety; and, are in the opinion of staff, contrary to the public interest.

694-30A(5) Does the proposal adversely affect adjacent premises

Chapter 694 establishes specific provisions applicable to the CHNPS-SSD which support the absence of signage in the area. Any additional signage in the area should be cognizant of the area's unique character, and should make efforts to avoid any detrimental visual impact on the adjacent civic space and designated historic buildings.

It is the opinion of staff that the location of the Proposed Signs which are to be erected adjacent to cultural and historically significant uses, is in direct conflict with the intention of the CHNPS-SSD. Furthermore, the scale and magnitude of the Proposed Signs along Albert Street, is inconsistent with the scale and type of development on adjacent properties and is in contrast to the provisions of Chapter 297, which limit signage in the area. To ensure that new signage does not adversely affect adjacent premises, it is the opinion of staff that these provisions should continue to apply.

594-30A(6) Does the proposal adversely affect public safety

As the Appellant noted in their original submission package, the Proposed Signs are appropriately setback from the public right-of-way and do not have an impact on pedestrian or vehicular visibility or safety. Staff agree with this sentiment, and are of the opinion that the proposal does not adversely affect public safety.

694-30A(9) Is the proposal, in the opinion of the Chief Building Official, contrary to the public interest

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 10

The quality and character of streets and the public realm is in part, determined by the type, number and quality of signs visible along streets and the public realm. Perhaps more than any other part of the public realm, signs are designed to be noticed and communicate information, making them a major factor setting the visual quality and character of the City's streets and places, and our shared public spaces. Chapter 694 therefore partly determines the kind of daily experience residents, visitors and tourists have of Toronto's streets, places and public realm.

The intention of a Special Sign District is to identify an area of Toronto where signs are a factor setting the area's fundamental visual character in a manner that differentiates it from other sign districts in the city. In the case of the CHNPS-SSD, signage is to be restricted in order to maintain the area's distinct character, and ensure the sacrosanct nature of the area is preserved for the public's experience.

Similarly, Toronto's Official Plan acknowledges that one's enjoyment of streets and open spaces partly depends on the visual quality of these spaces, most of which are influenced directly by the built form on adjacent properties. For the most part, future development in the city will come from infill and redevelopment and will need to fit in, while respecting and improving the character of the surrounding area. Specifically, the Official Plan requires that new development be located and organized to fit with its existing and/or planned context.

While the Appellant argues that the Proposed Signs serve the interest of the public who are seeking the shops and services located on the premises, this is contrary to both the Official Plan and Chapter 694 provisions guiding development in the area surrounding 483 Bay Street. As such, it is the opinion of staff that the proposal is contrary to the public interest.

Table 6: Summary of Impact Criteria Meets Section Criteria Description Criteria? Rationale (yes/no) • The magnitude of the Proposed Signs is inconsistent with the scale and type of development on adjacent properties. Does not adversely • The proposed ground sign at the 694-30 A(5) affect adjacent No intersection of Bay and Albert premises Street, is directly adjacent Toronto's old and new City Hall, and would impact the sacrosanct nature of this portion of Bay Street.

• The Proposed Signs are appropriately Does not adversely setback from the public right-of-way and do 694-30 A(6) Yes affect public safety not have an impact on pedestrian or vehicular visibility or safety.

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 11

• It is the opinion of staff that the Proposed Signs are contrary to both the Official Plan Is not contrary to the 694-30 A(9) No and Chapter 694 provisions guiding public interest development in the area surrounding 483 Bay Street.

CONCLUSION

In consideration of the original materials submitted by the applicant to support the variance requested, it is the Sign By-law Unit’s position that it has not been established that the requested variance required for the Proposed Signs meet all nine of the required criteria. As such, it is recommended that the Sign Variance Committee refuse the variance requested from Chapter 694, Signs, General, and from and from Chapter 297, Sign, of the Former City of Toronto Municipal Code, by the Appellant required for the Proposed Signs.

CONTACT

Robert Bader Supervisor, Sign By-law Unit Tel: (416) 392-4113 E-mail: [email protected]

SIGNATURE

______Ted Van Vliet Manager, Sign By-law Unit

ATTACHMENTS

1. Description of Sign and Required Variances 2. Applicant's Submission Package

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 12

ATTACHMENT 1: DESCRIPTION OF SIGN AND REQUIRED VARIANCES

DESRCRIPTION OF SIGN

Three first party ground signs to be located at the premises municipally known as 483 Bay Street described as follows:

a. Sign A: i. located at the north-east corner of the intersection of Bay Street and Albert Street and having a height of 4.27 metres; ii. containing two sign faces described as follows: 1. in the shape of a rectangle; 2. having a total sign face area of 5.21 square metres; 3. having a horizontal measurement of 1.22 metres; 4. having a vertical measurement of 4.27 metres; 5. displaying static copy; 6. illuminated, in compliance with § 694-18; and 7. one sign face facing oriented in a northerly direction and one sign face oriented in a southerly direction.

b. Sign B: i. located at the north-west corner of the intersection of Albert Street and James Street and having a height of 4.27 metres; ii. containing two sign faces described as follows: 1. in the shape of a rectangle; 2. having a total sign face area of 5.21 square metres; 3. having a horizontal measurement of 1.22 metres; 4. having a vertical measurement of 4.27 metres; 5. displaying static copy; 6. illuminated, in compliance with § 694-18; and, 7. one sign face facing oriented in a easterly direction and one sign face oriented in a westerly direction

c. Sign C: i. located on the Bay Street frontage on the northerly portion of the premises and having a height of 3.66 metres; ii. containing two sign faces described as follows: 1. in the shape of a rectangle; 2. having a total sign face area of 2.66 square metres; 3. having a horizontal measurement of 0.97 metres; 4. having a vertical measurement of 2.74 metres; 5. displaying both static copy and readograph copy; 6. illuminated, in compliance with § 694-18; and, 7. one sign face facing oriented in a northerly direction and one sign face oriented in a southerly direction.

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 13

REQUIRED VARIANCES:

1. The requirement contained at §694—26F(1) that no person shall erect or display a ground sign along the east side of Bay Street between Albert Street and Dundas Street West nor along the north side of Albert Street between James Street and Bay Street.

2. The requirement contained at §694—26F(1) a non-illuminated wall sign for the purpose of identification is permitted provided that it shall not exceed a height of 10 metres on the westerly or southerly facing wall.

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 14

ATTACHMENT 2: APPLICANT'S SUBMISSION PACKAGE

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 15

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 16

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 17

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 18

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 19

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 20

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 21

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 22

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 23

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 24

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 25

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 26

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 27

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 28

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 29

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 30

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 31

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 32

Figure 3: View of building and rendering of proposed sign 'A', north on Bay Street

NOTE: **Staff depiction of sign based on applicant submission - Sign not to scale**

Appeal by Kramer Design – Signage Master Plan – 483 Bay Street 33